PUDUCHERRY S.C. PEOPLE WELFARE ASSOCIATION versus CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT., UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY & ORS.

Citation: [2014] 13 S.C.R. 1087 · Decided: 07-08-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RAJENDRA MAL LODHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 13 S.C.R. 1087 
PUDUCHERRY S.C. PEOPLE WELFARE ASSOCIATION 
A 
v. 
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT., UNION TERRITORY OF 
PONDICHERRY & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 10829-10830 of 2010) 
AUGUST 07, 2014 
[R. M. LODHA, CJI, MADAN B. LOKUR AND 
KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.] 
Service Law - Reservation - For Scheduled Caste 
candidates - Entitlement - Government Orders related to 
reservation benefits in promotion and employment to Group 
B 
c 
C and D posts and in professional courses - Challenge to -
Held: Impugned Government Orders not sustainable as they 0 
were not in consonance with the Presidential Order, 1964 -
By no executive power, amendment, modification, alteration 
or variance in the Presidential Order was permissible - It was 
not open to the executive to do anything directly or indirectly 
leading to any change in the Presidential Order - Once E 
Presidential Order was issued u/Art. 341 (1) or Art. 342(1) of 
Constitution, any amendment in the Presidential Order could 
only be made by the Parliament by law as provided in Arts. 
341 (2) or 342(2) of Constitution, as the case may be, and in 
no other manner -
Interpretation of 'resident' in the F 
Presidential Order as 'of origin' amounted to altering the 
Presidential Order - Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled 
Castes Order, 1964 - Constitution of India, 1950-Arts. 341 
and 342. 
The appellant is an association representing the G 
Scheduled Caste residents having permanent 
residence/place of abode in Pu du cherry. The association 
filed Writ Petitions before the High Court challenging the 
two Government Orders, 'G.O.M. 11/2005' and 'G.0.M. 12/ 
H 
1087 
1088 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 
A 2005'] both dated 05.08.2005. G.0.M. 11/2005 relates to 
reservation benefits in promotion and employment to 
Group C & D posts and the other G.O.M. 12/2005 relates 
to reservation benefits in professional courses. The High 
Court dismissed the Writ Petitions. The matter came up 
B before this Court. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. The impugned Government Orders 
cannot be sustained on the short ground, viz., they being 
c not in consonance with the Constitution (Pondicherry) 
Scheduled Castes Order, 1964. It is seen from para 2 of 
the above Presidential Order that the castes, races or 
tribes or parts of or groups within castes, races or tribes 
(15 in all) specified in the Schedule appended thereto 
0 are deemed to be Scheduled Castes for the purposes of 
the Constitution in relation to the Union Territory of 
Pondicherry so far as regards members thereof are 
resident in the Union Territory. The Government Orders, 
however, have confined reservation benefits to 
Scheduled Castes origins of the Union Territory of 
E Pondicherry. It would be seen that the Presidential Order 
does not speak of "origins" of the Union Territory of 
Pondicherry, it only speaks of "resident". [Paras 11, 12 
and 13][1092-E-F; 1093-E-H] 
F 
1.2. It is by virtue of the notification of President 
under Article 341(1) of the Constitution that the 
Scheduled Castes come into being. The members of 
the Scheduled Castes are drawn from castes, races or 
tribes, they attain a new status by virtue of Presidential 
G Order. Clause (2) of Article 341 empowers Parliament 
alone by law to include or exclude from the list of 
Scheduled Castes specified in a notification issued 
under Clause (1) by the President. By no executive 
power, the amendment, modification, alteration or 
H 
PUDUCHERRY S.C. PEOPLE WELFARE ASSN. v. CHIEF SEC. 
1089 
TO GOVT., U.T. OF PONDICHERRY 
variance in the Preside_ntial Order is permissible. It is not A 
open to the executive to do anything directly or indirectly 
which may lead to any change in the Presidential Order. 
Once Presidential Order has been issued under Article 
341(1) or Article 342(1), any amendment in the 
Presidential Order can only be made by the Parliament B 
by law as provided in Article 341 (2) or Article 342(2), as 
the case may be, and in no other manner. The 
interpretation of "resident" in the Presidential Order as 
"of origin" amounts to altering the Presidential 
Order. Thus, the impugned Government Orders - G.O.M. C 
11/2005 and G.O.M. 12/2005 - not being in conformity 
and consonance with the Presidential Order, 1964 
cannot be sustained in law and have to be set aside. 
[Paras 15, 16)(1094-D-H; 1095-A-B] 
S. Pushpa and others v. Sivachanmugavelu and 
D 
others (2005) 3 SCC 1 ; State of Uttaranchal v. 
Sandeep Kumar Singh and Others (201
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.